Friday, December 21, 2007

Since The Mitchell Report has been released there has been a rather strange reaction to the Roger Clemens revelation. While the majority of the media appears to be skewering him, there has been a lot of support putting him closer to 50/50 than 90/10. In contrast to Barry Bonds, that is newsworthy. Yet no one wants to approach the subject. Is there a racial explanation? As with most issues it is complex. Afterall, Bonds is one gigantic asshole who has an awful relationship with the press. Still, could the discrepancy be based solely on that? Or is it because Bonds shattered the HR records?